It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Boadicea
Well, yeah... any "assumption" is ridiculous. But I didn't make any assumptions. I stated alternatives to YOUR assumptions.
And, by definition, it wouldn't be me moving goalposts... it's Mueller/Rosenstein moving the goalposts by getting someone else to do their dirty work for them, and hence avoid the "goalposts" getting in their way.
Nope. Not me! I have and am demanding complete transparency by all government officials. That's not undermining anything -- except potential corruption by those "investigating." And as long as those investigators are undermining the investigation of their activities -- i.e., refusing to provide the docs and records subpoena'd by the House -- their credibility is zilch. They have already proven to me by their own words and actions that THEY cannot be trusted.
I believe what you are really asking is why I haven't complained about only Trump's lack of transparency. Because in reality I have been demanding such transparency from everyone. And "everyone" includes Trump.
originally posted by: Dfairlite
First and foremost the constitution. The 4th and 6th amendments were violated pretty underhandedly. But we know they don't care about the constitution they want to get trump, regardless of cost. Remember, this is the ends justify the means crowd.
Your assumption requires a greater leap in logic than mine since there is no proof whatsoever that Mueller is corrupt. My assumption relies on the fact that Mueller is trying to do his job properly, which frankly, is the most reasonable one to to make, provided no evidence of corruption is available.
Do you know how unusual it is to investigate an investigation that is currently ongoing? When investigations are under suspicion of having been conducted improperly, you wait until it is finished and the ENTIRE investigation can be reviewed as one. The fact that they are trying to investigate the investigation while it is ongoing REEKS of being a distraction.
Nope. I didn't stutter. I have literally NEVER seen you even mention a concern about how Trump has rolled back a lot of transparency steps that Obama implemented. The only thing I see you care about is investigating investigators because of an assumption of mistrust in the investigators. You seem to do a FANTASTIC job of convincing yourself not to trust people critical of Trump but never seem to question Trump on his transparency and possible corruption. Hell, Trump lies more often than the people you said you don't trust have ever lied and you still seem to trust him more than them.
But I was listening to Judge Andrew Napolitano on the radio on my way into work this morning, and he made some good points that I will dumb down (because of memory) here:
originally posted by: Boadicea
Nope. I haven't assumed anything. I have only pointed out the potential for corruption and the lack of transparency to know either way... therefore, corruption is most definitely on the table.
Further, there is a very big difference between "evidence" and "proof." And while we do not have the transparency to know if there is proof, we do have plenty of facts constituting evidence of wrongdoing and corruption. And not just in this particular instance pertaining to Trump.
But the bottom line is the same: It is not up to us to decide who we "believe." It is up to them to provide the evidence and proof for us to know.
That sounds about right -- at least the part about me never singling out Trump. And while you may not have "seen" it, I have criticized "Team Trump" and "Trump et al" much the same way I have criticized "Team Obama" and "Obama et al." Because I know better than to believe that anyone does anything alone in DC. The critters operate in packs.
Offhand, I cannot think of anything Trump has done more or worse than Obama in terms of rolling back "a lot of transparency steps that Obama implemented." Actually, I cannot think of any transparency steps that Obama implemented... In fact, exactly the opposite. From where I'm sitting, no one has prosecuted and persecuted more whistleblowers than Team Obama. That's not transparency. And quite honestly, I hope I never do single out any one person because it's not the person that matters. If it's wrong for one then it's wrong for everyone -- past, present and future. So no, I won't single out one person and give a free pass to everyone else.
HA! No you haven't. You are quite clearly assuming that these entities are thoroughly corrupt and working from there.
This isn't even what I was talking about. I SPECIFICALLY mentioned Trump reducing government transparency that Obama enacted...
... and you have to ramble on about vague times you were critical of the Trump admin instead. That's a deflection.
No That was what the magazine paid the playboy bunny. Stormy only got 130k